BETA HEALTH CARE PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED vs AXIS BANK LIMITED

Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 15260

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P. V. BALAKRISHNAN, J
BETA HEALTH CARE PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
AXIS BANK LIMITED – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 3611 OF 2026

Important Points

A writ petition challenging loan classification as NPA under SARFAESI is premature if no prior objection is filed.

Subject

Civil - Banking

Act Referred

SARFAESI Act: S.13(2)

Headnote

This case examines the challenge against the classification of a MSME loan account as a Non-Performing Asset under the SARFAESI Act. The petitioner sought restoration and restructuring, but the Court found the petition premature for lack of prior objection submission. The Court allowed for future representation against the notice issued, dismissing the writ petition accordingly.

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.J.R.PREM NAVAZ, SHRI.MUHAMMED SWADIQ
For the Respondents: SHRI.R.S.KALKURA, SHRI.M.S.KALESH

Table of Content
1. challenge against classification of loan account as npa. (Para 1)
2. court finds writ petition premature without prior representation. (Para 2)
3. petitioner granted liberty to submit representation. (Para 3)

P.V. BALAKRISHNAN, J.

….....................................

…........................................................... Dated this the 10^th day of March, 2026 JUDGMENT The petitioner has rushed to this Court immediately after receiving a notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act , challenging the classification of the petitioner's MSME loan account as a Non-Performing Asset (NPA), seeking restoration of the loan account to a standard category and to consider the petitioner's request for restructuring/rehabilitation in accordance with the mandatory RBI-MSME framework.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

3. I am of the considered view that the present writ petition is highly premature since, the petitioner has wihtout even filing a representation/objection to the Section 13(2) notice has approached this Court. That apart it is to be taken note that the petitioner can take all the contentions now projected in this writ petition in his representation/objection to Section 13(2)

notice, which the bank is duty bound to consider.

In such circumstances, this writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to file a proper representation/objection to Section 13(2) notice, before the appropriate authority within a period of one week from today. On filing such objections the respondents concerned shall pass appropriate orders on it.

Sd/-